USC student arrested in fatal stabbing of man breaking into car at Greek Row, police say
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do not waive your right to self defense by confronting someone over a crime.
Now if the guy took off running and you chased him 2 blocks and stabbed him in the back then yeah, that's not self defense. You also can't just run up and start stabbing them (in most cases, if they were actively murdering people then it would be ok).
But if you catch someone breaking into something or assaulting some girl etc. and then they turn on you, then you still have a self defense option.
Now, in this specific case we don't have all the details yet around the final seconds of the encounter. We do know that the stabber did not chase the guy after the stabs.
I suppose believing that confronting car thieves is somehow analogous to offering hungry bears bologna sandwiches makes some sort of sense to you …. which is actually bat-chit-crazy talk, to be honest … but may partially explain why you’re always on the wrong side of every debate, doesn’t it?
Now, if you’re proposing that human criminals are akin to wild animals, that I might partially agree with, but I don’t believe that was the point you were trying to make.
But there are deeper connotations in your viewpoint that law abiding citizens shouldn’t be confronting criminals, which seems to be the only problem you see in this scenario. But I gotta tell ya, it is exactly this type of non-thinking that is leading us to the inevitable dystopian future, where criminals should enjoy protection from the society they are choosing to victimize, rather than the other way around.
A better way to look at this from the larger perspective is to ask yourself … should a law abiding citizen ignore, or look the other way, and choose not to get involved if a criminal was tugging and ripping a purse from a little old lady’s hands? Thats your view? Well, I couldn’t more strongly disagree. In my view, not only should he intervene, but he has a moral and civic obligation to step in. If someone were victimizing you, I would intervene on your behalf, and I don’t even like you
Of course I already know you’ll point out the difference between intervening in a crime on behalf of the little old lady, and intervening in a car burglary, while ignoring the larger and more obvious similarities in confronting a criminal in the process of committing a crime. But that’s actually the more salient point. Civic duty, moral obligations, and doing the right thing …. all of which seem to be the antithesis of liberal logic.
I think you can do better than insulting me on every post. I have never insulted you on any post even though we often disagree. Be better.
That analogy was from a side discussion about the difference between a girl being raped because she is wearing provocative clothes, and this guy confronting a thief.
I'm not making any judgement about this guy, I am only talking about a legal self-defense argument. If it was as straight forward legally as you want it to be, he wouldn't be in jail.
Regardless of how the facts come out. Simply confronting someone about a crime does not waive their right to self defense.
Yes? No?
Now if they went further like chasing and then stabbing the guy, then we can agree upon unlawful actions.
Not trying to offend but I'm picking up on a very strong vibe of suburban upper-middle never having to worry about theft or assault too much and certainly not appartment living where loss of car = loss of job and homelessness. (this is how my kids grew up, I grew up lower middle and have friends that live very poor and friends with 7M homes. Diversity, consider how it impacts others.)
P.S. I love your heart, I wish more were like you. Truly. The harsh reality is that some of us have alot of money relative to an annoyance of losing 1k. Others, it's a feed my kids, existential threat level loss and that feeds into the culture. My roomate in college was a latino (like this guy) and dirt poor from a rough area. Great guy, now a doctor. But $20 was a fortune to this guy in college. Just reflect. All the best.
A USC student whom police accused of fatally stabbing a man who had broken into a car on Greek Row will not be charged in the killing, prosecutors announced Thursday.
Ivan Gallegos, 19, was being held on bail of $2 million after Los Angeles police say he and two others confronted Xavier Cerf, 27, as he was breaking into a car, and Gallegos pulled out a knife and fatally stabbed him.
"After careful consideration and a thorough review of all available evidence, we have decided not to pursue charges against ... Gallegos. We believe that Mr. Gallegos’s actions were driven by a genuine fear for his life and the lives of others," Dist. Atty. George Gascon said in a statement. "Our heart goes out to the deceased’s family, friends and everyone impacted by this tragic incident."
Regardless of how the facts come out. Simply confronting someone about a crime does not waive their right to self defense.
Yes? No?
Now if they went further like chasing and then stabbing the guy, then we can agree upon unlawful actions.
Not trying to offend but I'm picking up on a very strong vibe of suburban upper-middle never having to worry about theft or assault too much and certainly not appartment living where loss of car = loss of job and homelessness. (this is how my kids grew up, I grew up lower middle and have friends that live very poor and friends with 7M homes. Diversity, consider how it impacts others.)
P.S. I love your heart, I wish more were like you. Truly. The harsh reality is that some of us have alot of money relative to an annoyance of losing 1k. Others, it's a feed my kids, existential threat level loss and that feeds into the culture. My roomate in college was a latino (like this guy) and dirt poor from a rough area. Great guy, now a doctor. But $20 was a fortune to this guy in college. Just reflect. All the best.
I think it depends on the state. Again, they arrested him and he's in jail. I am far from upper middle class, and lived in apartments almost my entire life. It wasn't his car being broken into as far as I have read, it just said he was seen "breaking into cars". Again, I am not judging this kid, I am only posting from a legal standpoint.
This is from a NJ law firm site:
Self defense is an important aspect of New Jersey law. Self defense arises when the defendant believes that force is immediately necessary to protect himself from unlawful force. However, there are some requirements which must be met in order for the use of force to be justified as self defense.
New Jersey law requires that the defendant has a duty to retreat first. If this is not possible, than the defendant must have reasonable belief about three subjects in order to constitute self defense:
The force used must be immediately necessary
The force against the defendant must be unlawful
The amount of force used must be necessary
This means that the defendant must be threatened with immediate, illegal violence or other unlawful action, and that the action required the amount of force with which the defendant responded. A defense of Self Defense is disregarded if any of these conditions are not met. For example, if someone is threatening to assault you, you have the right to fight back. However, if the threat involves the use of fists, you do not have the right to pull out and use a knife on your attacker. The use of a knife is an excessive amount of force not covered under self defense.
Deadly force is only justifiable if the defendant reasonable believed it was necessary to protect himself from death or serious bodily injury.
In order to determine if the force used under self defense was unreasonable, the judge and jury must consider facts regarding the circumstances surrounding the incident. For example, the look at the size, age, and physical condition of both individuals in assessing whether self defense was necessary. Under normal circumstances, a physically fit man cannot claim self defense against a child or, in the case of a domestic violence disturbance, a physically fit man cannot declare self defense against his smaller wife/partner unless a weapon is involved. The facts looked at by a judge and jury also involve the attackers reputation and whether it was a violent one, or previous convictions for violent crimes.
These conditions can also be applied in the protection of a third party. If the defendant has reason to belief force is necessary to protect another from an aggressor, he has the right to use the necessary force required to repel the aggressor. Unlike self defense, however, there is no duty to retreat and if the defendant is mistaken about his belief that the victim needed his help, he can still claim this defense if the circumstances make the mistake reasonable.
A person also has the right to use force against another to defend his home. A person must believe the force is necessary to prevent the crime which the aggressor is committing on his property, and prior to using the force the defendant must request that the aggressor stop his behavior unless the request endangers the defendant or the property in question. Deadly force is justifiable to combat a person committing arson, burglary, robbery, or any crime involving the theft or destruction of property if either of two requirements are met:
the defendant reasonably believes that the person against whom it is employed is using or threatening to use deadly force in the defendant’s presence. b) the defendant believes he can stop the crime being committed with deadly force but anything less will expose himself or another to danger.
The same standards apply to personal property, such as a car or valuables, but the use of deadly force is never justified under these circumstances.
I think it depends on the state. Again, they arrested him and he's in jail. I am far from upper middle class, and lived in apartments almost my entire life. It wasn't his car being broken into as far as I have read, it just said he was seen "breaking into cars". Again, I am not judging this kid, I am only posting from a legal standpoint.
This is from a NJ law firm site:
This occurred in California, not New Jersey.
Now if you want to come back with an argument as to why this can't be Self-Defense based on CA law. I would be more than welcome to see it.
Now if you want to come back with an argument as to why this can't be Self-Defense based on CA law. I would be more than welcome to see it.
I was just giving an example of how laws vary by state. In response to posters saying it's not illegal to confront a thief and use deadly force.
This is California:
In addition to protecting yourself and others, you are allowed in California to fight back to protect your property if:
there was an imminent threat of harm to your property, and
you used reasonable force to defend your property.7
The thing is it says "your" property, and I don't think we have enough info to know if it was his car. Most of the articles say he was seen "breaking into cars" but not specifically his car.
"The only time when shooting someone who is breaking into your car is likely to prove a solid defense of your actions is when the vehicle is occupied. If you are in the automobile at the time of the attempted break-in, you could feel that your life is in danger. In this case, the use of deadly force, including shooting the potential carjacker, will likely be viewed as reasonable self-defense.
Similarly, even if you are not in your car at the time, but a friend or family member is inside, shooting the person breaking into your vehicle will likely be viewed as reasonable force. However, if the criminal was unaware that anyone was inside, and witnesses can attest that you gave no warning before shooting, your self-defense or defense-of-others claim could fall apart.
Reasonable force is the amount of force that a reasonable person would deem necessary to protect their property or themselves. Using deadly force can be justified when you or a loved one are in danger. However, when it is simply your property that could come to harm, there is no justification for deadly force in California."
Interesting even though we had all of the armchair quarterbacks trying to convince us that this guy was guilty and it wasn't a case of self-defense. Well we now know how it played out.
“After careful consideration and a thorough review of all available evidence, we have decided not to pursue charges against USC student Ivan Gallegos,” the statement said. “We believe that Mr. Gallegos’s actions were driven by a genuine fear for his life and the lives of others. Our heart goes out to the deceased’s family, friends and everyone impacted by this tragic incident.“
Gascon is one of the most Liberal Progressive Anti-victim DAs in the US, but the fact that even he saw it was a case of self-defense should tell people quite a bit.
Interesting even though we had all of the armchair quarterbacks trying to convince us that this guy was guilty and it wasn't a case of self-defense. Well we now know how it played out.
Gascon is one of the most Liberal Progressive Anti-victim DAs in the US, but the fact that even he saw it was a case of self-defense should tell people quite a bit.
If you mean me, I wasn’t doing that at all, and if you think I did it means you didn’t actually read my posts. You won’t find a single one of my posts on this thread claiming I think he was guilty. On just about every post I made on this thread, I said I wasn’t judging him at all. I said whether self defense would hold up depends on factors and we didn’t have enough information yet. Most of my arguments were to people who claimed that it was always OK to use deadly force to confront a thief in terms of legality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But $20 was a fortune to this guy in college. Just reflect. All the best.
